Scott Hannan is a vastly superior player to Schultz. He has all of Schultz's strengths, save his length, yet he wins battles, rubs out forwards along the boards with great prejudice, is significantly stronger, and is a better skater. He's also approaching 1000 games of NHL experience.

The Scott Hannan comment was in regards to the bolded comment about bad line changes leading to OT losses. Specifically Hannan's change in Game 2 that led to Bergenheim's OT goal.

Quote:

Originally Posted by NobodyBeatsTheWiz

And the Chapman comparison doesn't make sense for a variety of reasons. First of all, as you said, Chapman is anything but a finished product. He has under 30 innings of MLB experience. Schultz has almost 340 games of NHL experience. Second, as a pitcher, Chapman is largely isolated in his performance. He can't have teammates cover his mistakes (for the most part) and can't be carried by being on a strong team. Schultz can be, and often is made to look better by his teammates.

My point wasn't specifically about praising or condemning Chapman. That's a whole different conversation for a whole different forum (short version: the kid could be really special but is still really raw). The point was to show that awesome peripherals don't mean awesome performance. They typically correlate with it, but it's not always a direct relationship. Perhaps I should have went with someone like Jeremy Guthrie, who constantly outperforms his peripherals and advanced metrics. His actual ERA is always lower than his FIP, tERA, etc.

I take responsibility for not making my point clear enough. Looking those peripherals from Chapman would suggest an all-star pitcher. Yet looking at his actual performance would suggest a AAA call-up. Yes, hockey stats and baseball stats are not the same. That wasn't my point. It was merely an anecdote about how peripheral characteristics don't directly correspond with performance.

Quote:

Originally Posted by NobodyBeatsTheWiz

I have no doubt Schultz in a legitimate NHL defenseman. I'm not going to argue he's AHL caliber. But he's a liability for what this team wants to do (win in the playoffs). He'd be much better off on a team that plays a very defensive style that's fine just trying to get into the playoffs.

I have no problem moving Schultz if the move fills a need. But shipping him off for draft picks or prospects would hurt the team more than help it. In a vacuum, this team is better with Schultz than without him. Schultz is a better partner for Green and Hannan than Erskine is. And the further Sloan (or Collins or Fahey) is away from the ice, the better.

The Scott Hannan comment was in regards to the bolded comment about bad line changes leading to OT losses. Specifically Hannan's change in Game 2 that led to Bergenheim's OT goal.

Uh, Bergenheim didn't score the OT goal in game 2. It was Lecavalier on a 2-on-1, which was caused by Schultz taking an eternity to get on the ice.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mystlyfe

My point wasn't specifically about praising or condemning Chapman. That's a whole different conversation for a whole different forum (short version: the kid could be really special but is still really raw). The point was to show that awesome peripherals don't mean awesome performance. They typically correlate with it, but it's not always a direct relationship. Perhaps I should have went with someone like Jeremy Guthrie, who constantly outperforms his peripherals and advanced metrics. His actual ERA is always lower than his FIP, tERA, etc.

I take responsibility for not making my point clear enough. Looking those peripherals from Chapman would suggest an all-star pitcher. Yet looking at his actual performance would suggest a AAA call-up. Yes, hockey stats and baseball stats are not the same. That wasn't my point. It was merely an anecdote about how peripheral characteristics don't directly correspond with performance.

There's absolutely no comparison between peripherals in baseball and in hockey. You can't compare a sport with discrete events and one with continuous play. That's why I don't get the comparison. I understand the point you're trying to make, but baseball is not the sport to use. I disagree with your point anyway, in the context of the playoffs. Schultz is the player you described in the regular season. He's been that player for one short period in the playoffs.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mystlyfe

I have no problem moving Schultz if the move fills a need. But shipping him off for draft picks or prospects would hurt the team more than help it. In a vacuum, this team is better with Schultz than without him. Schultz is a better partner for Green and Hannan than Erskine is. And the further Sloan (or Collins or Fahey) is away from the ice, the better.

Again, it might hurt the team in the regular season moving Schultz for futures, but I think it's addition by subtraction in the playoffs. Other than that stretch in the Rangers' series, can you point to any other time in his playoff career when Schultz has been remotely effective?

I mean, Green is perceived as one of the biggest playoff goats in the league, but at least he has 25 points in 36 playoff games.

Uh, Bergenheim didn't score the OT goal in game 2. It was Lecavalier on a 2-on-1, which was caused by Schultz taking an eternity to get on the ice.

You're correct that it was Vinny not Bergenheim, that was my mistake.
The play was at least as much Hannan's fault as Schultz's (more in my opinion, as I don't think Hannan should have gone for a change in that situation, and his speed getting to the bench was just as much at fault as Schult'z getting off). To pin it all on Schultz is ignoring a large portion of the problem. Schultz was already screwed by the time he stepped onto the ice.

Quote:

“It was a bad change,” Hannan said. “I thought the puck was going in behind. When you make mistakes, it costs in the playoffs. I was a little tired and thought I could get off in time, but obviously, I couldn’t. It was a bad play.”

There's absolutely no comparison between peripherals in baseball and in hockey. You can't compare a sport with discrete events and one with continuous play. That's why I don't get the comparison. I understand the point you're trying to make, but baseball is not the sport to use. I disagree with your point anyway, in the context of the playoffs. Schultz is the player you described in the regular season. He's been that player for one short period in the playoffs.

I'm very much aware of the differences between stats in baseball and hockey. I was simply using that analogy to show that peripherals don't directly correspond to performance. My analogy was not ment to be a direct comparisson between baseball and hockey in any way.

Quote:

Originally Posted by NobodyBeatsTheWiz

Again, it might hurt the team in the regular season moving Schultz for futures, but I think it's addition by subtraction in the playoffs. Other than that stretch in the Rangers' series, can you point to any other time in his playoff career when Schultz has been remotely effective?

I mean, Green is perceived as one of the biggest playoff goats in the league, but at least he has 25 points in 36 playoff games.

He's had, what, three post-season series at this point? Just three games played in the other two years combined. Having one good series among three is about on par for what the Capitals do in the post-season. Not that it's desirable, but I just don't think he's the root of the problem.

Like I said, limit his role to what he's good at and we get a much better product out of him. Bringing in fiesty players who aren't "passengers" doesn't automatically mean eliminating useful complimentary players from your arsenal. And his salary isn't so large that we need cap relief from it.

You're correct that it was Vinny not Bergenheim, that was my mistake.
The play was at least as much Hannan's fault as Schultz's (more in my opinion, as I don't think Hannan should have gone for a change in that situation, and his speed getting to the bench was just as much at fault as Schult'z getting off). To pin it all on Schultz is ignoring a large portion of the problem. Schultz was already screwed by the time he stepped onto the ice.

Like I said, limit his role to what he's good at and we get a much better product out of him. Bringing in fiesty players who aren't "passengers" doesn't automatically mean eliminating useful complimentary players from your arsenal. And his salary isn't so large that we need cap relief from it.

What's Hannan going to say? "It was Schultz's fault, he's too damn slow"? I watched that play maybe two dozen times after it happened. Hannan signaled for a change and started to go off before the puck was even dumped. There was a TON of time for Schultz to get on.

I don't even know how someone in their right mind can attempt to defend Schultz's playoff performance. He's not a useful complementary player in the post season.

What's Hannan going to say? "It was Schultz's fault, he's too damn slow"? I watched that play maybe two dozen times after it happened. Hannan signaled for a change and started to go off before the puck was even dumped. There was a TON of time for Schultz to get on.

I don't even know how someone in their right mind can attempt to defend Schultz's playoff performance. He's not a useful complementary player in the post season.

So, what, you wanted Schultz to jump on while Hannan was still on the other side of the rink? Schultz wasn't fast getting off the bench, but Hannan didn't do him any favors going for a change in that situation.

And I don't even know how someone in their right mind would suggest that ditching Schultz is addition by subtraction. We were skaing with freaking SEAN COLLINS in game 4. Sean. Collins. We need to keep the AHL brigade as far away from the ice come playoff time as possible.

So, what, you wanted Schultz to jump on while Hannan was still on the other side of the rink? Schultz wasn't fast getting off the bench, but Hannan didn't do him any favors going for a change in that situation.

And I don't even know how someone in their right mind would suggest that ditching Schultz is addition by subtraction. We were skaing with freaking SEAN COLLINS in game 4. Sean. Collins. We need to keep the AHL brigade as far away from the ice come playoff time as possible.

It appears we're going to have to agree to disagree on this one.

No, I wanted Schultz to take the initiative and get on the ice before Hannan was on the bench, and then haul ass to get back in his zone. You're so off on this one. At this point, I think you're arguing just to play devil's advocate.

We were skating Collins in game 4 because of a rash of injuries. The assumption would be, if you ditch Schultz for draft picks, another guy would be acquired for the 7th defenseman. I'd play any one of the Caps other 7 defenseman (save Sloan) over Schultz in the playoffs.

Let's say the Caps re-sign Hannan and sign Ehrhoff. Who would you play Schultz over?

Let's say the Caps re-sign Hannan and sign Ehrhoff. Who would you play Schultz over?

If we were to somehow add Ehrhoff and resign Hannan, I wouldn't play Schultz when everyone is healthy. I just don't anticipate that happening. I don't even know if we're going to resign Hannan. I think GMGM is going to take a defense that is very close to what we currently have into next season. A depth addition or two if he decides to send Sloan to Hershey.

Especially with Markov likely to stay in Montreal and Vancouver potentially hanging on to Ehrhoff, there really isn't much out there on the UFA market in terms of quality top 4 defensemen. If Bieksa makes it to UFA, he's a right shot and we already have 3 RD. While Jovo ceratinly isn't a passenger, I'm not sure how much he has left in the tank and if he can really play top 4 minutes by the time the playoffs roll around. Wisniewski is a right shot and could be resigned. That pretty much just leaves Hannan, and the market could drive his price up simply due to the lack of options. And he didn't look very good in the Tampa series, either.

Yes, I'd love a situation where we keep Hannan and bring in a guy to pair with Green. That would be terrific. And at that point, Schultz would have no real use to the team other than expensive depth. But I just really don't anticipate that becoming a reality. I wouldn't even mind signing Hannan and a guy like Ericsson and then moving Schultz (even if Ericsson has many of the same problems Schultz does, he's more mobile). Or if Poti were to be healthy enough to play effectively again. But in reality I doubt that's going to happen, and I doubt there is a D-for-D trade involving Schultz (though I really want the Schultz for Hjalmarsson trade that Hawks fans seem to be on board with). So Schultz is a superior option to Erskine and a vastly superior option to having Sloan/Fahey/Collins anywhere near the ice.

Are you F-ing kidding me? The Caps are serial underachievers when it matters while the Blues are just trying to get over the hump and start making the playoffs regularly again. They have missed the playoffs 4 of the last 5 seasons and got swept when they did make it. Anything remotely positive is going to be met with good reviews by fans supporting a team in those circumstances. And anything less than drastic changes is going to be met with endless streams of poo pooing around here.

But sure regardless of his -4, when the best defenseman on his team was +18, and of his being on for 59 goals against in only 55 games Polak rules while Schultz bumbled and stumbled his way to much better numbers and a very nice playoff series against the Rangers before he and pretty much everyone else on the team laid an egg against Tampa. All hail Roman Polak...

Are you F-ing kidding me? The Caps are serial underachievers when it matters while the Blues are just trying to get over the hump and start making the playoffs regularly again. They have missed the playoffs 4 of the last 5 seasons and got swept when they did make it. Anything remotely positive is going to be met with good reviews by fans supporting a team in those circumstances. And anything less than drastic changes is going to be met with endless streams of poo pooing around here.

But sure regardless of his -4, when the best defenseman on his team was +18, and of his being on for 59 goals against in only 55 games Polak rules while Schultz bumbled and stumbled his way to much better numbers and a very nice playoff series against the Rangers before he and pretty much everyone else on the team laid an egg against Tampa. All hail Roman Polak...

You're delusional. Roman Polak is a significantly better player than Schultz. You'd be hard pressed to find many that don't agree with that sentiment.

Funny thing is that Polak is exactly what this team needs, a fearless, physical, shut-down defenseman who's not slow but really fast. Get out of this Schultz garbage, if we ever win a cup he's only there for the ride, wouldn't do squat, a passenger. For all the *****ing that goes on surround Green and Semin they are 100 times the talents and players that Schultz will ever be, sorry. We're not going to win with such a passive player on the top-pairing, or any pairing for that matter. He can't look you in the eye, he can't step up either.

Feel bad for Sarge.....he's a good citizen and teammate. He just doesn't play with the edge that would make his lack of speed palatable. If he came in next season and showed a lot of snarl, he would stop taking a lot of heat instantly.

Feel bad for Sarge.....he's a good citizen and teammate. He just doesn't play with the edge that would make his lack of speed palatable. If he came in next season and showed a lot of snarl, he would stop taking a lot of heat instantly.

Substracting Schultz and adding another top-4 defender who can play with any of our right handed defenders.

While Ehrhoff is hard to get Tyutin is more available due to his UFA status next summer. There is no big doubt in my mind about Tyutin's inexperience because he got some matches on the international scene. That's like an ideal fit: mobile physical player with size and shot to play in any situation and left handed. He's not Pronger but I doubt that even Ehrhoff for 5M annually will be any incarnation of Pronger. It seems there are no sure prongers on the market. Tyutin could be a nicer consolation prize.

Bad news, I asked Ted about Brad Richards and he said that there's no room under the cap. You can say thanks to the contracts of Poti, Schultz, Sloan, and King. Four plays who are taking up upwards of 7 Million in cap space and shouldn't even be playing. We could have signed Richards or someone else that would help but not now.

Bad news, I asked Ted about Brad Richards and he said that there's no room under the cap. You can say thanks to the contracts of Poti, Schultz, Sloan, and King. Four plays who are taking up upwards of 7 Million in cap space and shouldn't even be playing. We could have signed Richards or someone else that would help but not now.

It's pretty unrealistic to expect any team to have zero bad contracts.

Of those four I think the biggest mistake is Poti. His injury history was well known before GMGM signed him to that extension. What was he thinking? I realize it was before the Hannan trade, but still, the guy's groin is as fragile as a Pinto. The good news is he can be put on LTIR.

I don't care one bit about the King and Sloan contracts. Those are guys you can send to Hershey at any time.

Schultz is Schultz. Probably overpaid, but not by so much that I'm going to get worked up about it.

Bad news, I asked Ted about Brad Richards and he said that there's no room under the cap. You can say thanks to the contracts of Poti, Schultz, Sloan, and King. Four plays who are taking up upwards of 7 Million in cap space and shouldn't even be playing. We could have signed Richards or someone else that would help but not now.

You can't sign one guy for the price of four; you can't just get rid of 3 roster spots like that. Not that those help things, but we can't afford Richards because we've got money committed to Ovie, Backstrom, Semin, Green, and Wideman. Poti's probably on LTIR. Schultz doesn't make all that much (whether it's a bad contract or not). Sloan and King are literally about as marginal as you can get in terms of contracts.

No sane fan should expect the Caps to be serious contenders to sign Richards, not while Semin (or maybe, maybe Green) is still here. It would be one of the biggest possible surprises for them to try to load up like that especially considering the future moves it might require. If you want to complain about those four players then complain about the players, don't grasp at a silly justification that was never valid to begin with.